Fuel source - Fat v Carbs for weightloss

[Deutscher32]

Hi guys,

Trying to get my head around this.

I use a heart rate monitor in my workouts and have done a unit in advanced heart rate training and have learnt that when your heart rate is in either zone 1 or zone 2 (1 being HR low) you burn the calories from fat while if you train in zone 3 you burn carbs as your fuel source.

Is it better to train in zone 1/2 and burn less calories but the calories coming from fat?

or

train in zone 3 and burn lots of calories but the calories coming from carbs?

which will be the better result for weightloss?

[starstrukked]

Just eat at a deficit

[Deutscher32]

Just eat at a deficit

For me its that easy but for my client it's another story.

He's 57, 170cm, 89kg.... ive been training strength with him and he does his own cardio. I work with him and he hardly eats throughout the day.. if anything 1/4 chicken or some crackers with ham or home-made soup. He hardly drinks anything (coffee in morning and couple cans pepsi maxs during the day).. he's now decided to cut out most carbs. If I train with him 3 days a week for 1hr at the end he will say he gained weight and if he doesnt go to the gym he losses weight.. it doesnt make sense to me unless he's eating more to compensate for the calories consumed at the gym but he denies it.

[FatRastafarian]

I asked a similar question on these forums a few days back. It's the whole LISS vs HIIT debate again ... In the end, what exercise you do doesn't really matter, you'll burn fat by eating at a deficit.

[nicklyne]

For me its that easy but for my client it's another story.

He's 57, 170cm, 89kg.... ive been training strength with him and he does his own cardio. I work with him and he hardly eats throughout the day.. if anything 1/4 chicken or some crackers with ham or home-made soup. He hardly drinks anything (coffee in morning and couple cans pepsi maxs during the day).. he's now decided to cut out most carbs. If I train with him 3 days a week for 1hr at the end he will say he gained weight and if he doesnt go to the gym he losses weight.. it doesnt make sense to me unless he's eating more to compensate for the calories consumed at the gym but he denies it.

what?


same story for everyone, you cant mess with science

he is in an obvs surplus so i suggest you go back to the http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=129247741

and have a read through it

I asked a similar question on these forums a few days back. It's the whole LISS vs HIIT debate again ... In the end, what exercise you do doesn't really matter, you'll burn fat by eating at a deficit.

this...


good luck FatRastaFarian!

[Electricheadd]

Hi guys,

Trying to get my head around this.

I use a heart rate monitor in my workouts and have done a unit in advanced heart rate training and have learnt that when your heart rate is in either zone 1 or zone 2 (1 being HR low) you burn the calories from fat while if you train in zone 3 you burn carbs as your fuel source.

Is it better to train in zone 1/2 and burn less calories but the calories coming from fat?

or

train in zone 3 and burn lots of calories but the calories coming from carbs?

which will be the better result for weightloss?

The most efficient is to train the way the burns the most calories but the big picture truth of the matter is that its somewhat irrelevant what your burning at any given point in the day. Here is why, for you to lose fat you need a caloric deficit, and to make up that deficit your body has to burn something and its first choice is body fat assuming protein intake is adequate.

[Deutscher32]

I asked a similar question on these forums a few days back. It's the whole LISS vs HIIT debate again ... In the end, what exercise you do doesn't really matter, you'll burn fat by eating at a deficit.

From a HR standpoint HIIT burns more calories due to your body having to work harder.
I do understand the deficit principle. It's just that my client swears to god he eats at a deficit and Ive told him numerous times its all a calories in v calories out solution.

same story for everyone, you cant mess with science

he is in an obvs surplus so i suggest you go back to the http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=129247741

and have a read through it

I hadn't looked at the url you posted but I'm sure its calculating calories & macros. Will check it after this post.
I have read and spoken to Emma-Leigh regarding calories & macros etc so I know about it all. I've given several clients the necessary data.
I did mention I'm a personal trainer and currently studying a diploma in fitness and probably do a nutrition course afterwards.
I've read some of Lyle McDonalds, Tom Venuto, Martin Berkham, Alan Aragon and Zyzz + other books.. also read the US medical journals.
I just can't work out why he's struggling losing weight. I know age plays a role in metabolism but what about other organs... i.e liver or thyroid? could these be something?

The most efficient is to train the way the burns the most calories but the big picture truth of the matter is that its somewhat irrelevant what your burning at any given point in the day. Here is why, for you to lose fat you need a caloric deficit, and to make up that deficit your body has to burn something and its first choice is body fat assuming protein intake is adequate.

I'm just learning about when your body burns different fuel sources and if theres any edge to burn fat (which will help break down fat cells etc) or carbs. He's 57 so his max heart rate is only 163 (220 - 57).

I'm just out of ideas what could be done to help the progress. Like I said he swears he's eating at a deficit by using the formulas but if theres another factor involved cause he's older I'm not sure about.. haven't really dealt with older people :/

[tmartin89]

I took a exercise physiology class last semester and we learned about this. Even though doing steady state cardio burns fat, it doesn't mean it's optimal for fat loss. Doing higher intensity will use the glycolytic system which does use carbs as the source of fuel, however; you will burn fats following your session and will burn calories for up to 24 hours after your session because of EPOC (excess post-exercise oxygen consumption).

With this being said, the only thing that will cause you to lose weight is a caloric deficit, so the more calories you burn the better. Cardio is a useful tool as it allows you to eat a little more and can help with your cut and bulk. The main thing is diet though, that will be the determining factor.

[Deutscher32]

I took a exercise physiology class last semester and we learned about this. Even though doing steady state cardio burns fat, it doesn't mean it's optimal for fat loss. Doing higher intensity will use the glycolytic system which does use carbs as the source of fuel, however; you will burn fats following your session and will burn calories for up to 24 hours after your session because of EPOC (excess post-exercise oxygen consumption).

With this being said, the only thing that will cause you to lose weight is a caloric deficit, so the more calories you burn the better. Cardio is a useful tool as it allows you to eat a little more and can help with your cut and bulk. The main thing is diet though, that will be the determining factor.

Awesome. Thanks for that! There's a few more things for me to research now!

I was thinking maybe by doing low heart rate using fat as fuel cardio might have some post exercise effects? or maybe if you start off with low intensity cardio to free those fatty acid then you increase intensity to burn the calories?

"The energy yield from a gram of fatty acids is approximately 9 Kcal (37 kJ), compared to 4 Kcal/g (17 kJ/g) for carbohydrates."

[tmartin89]

Awesome. Thanks for that! There's a few more things for me to research now!

I was thinking maybe by doing low heart rate using fat as fuel cardio might have some post exercise effects? or maybe if you start off with low intensity cardio to free those fatty acid then you increase intensity to burn the calories?

"The energy yield from a gram of fatty acids is approximately 9 Kcal (37 kJ), compared to 4 Kcal/g (17 kJ/g) for carbohydrates."

The post exercise effects from low intensity are minimal. The only thing starting with low intensity will do is kick in the aerobic system. The reason people don't feel good at the start of their run is because the aerobic system is still booting up so to speak, but once that kicks in they feel much better and get into a groove. I think the higher the intensity then the better for weight loss.

[Middlewt]

haven't really dealt with older people :/

LOL I think you're early 20's, yes? You'll "catch up" to him one day (so to speak), and FYI...see attachment (she's in her 50's). I think I took offense cuz I'm "old" too! Thanks for the laugh; I DO know what you meant! =)

[Deutscher32]

LOL I think you're early 20's, yes? You'll "catch up" to him one day (so to speak), and FYI...see attachment (she's in her 50's). I think I took offense cuz I'm "old" too! Thanks for the laugh; I DO know what you meant! =)

Haha I mean no offence. Yes im turning 24 in a few days. I just meant I haven't experienced how the body changes due to aging and I haven't really learnt too much about how different training and metabolism changes between from young adults and older adults.

[mikegt87]

I personally prefer to eat at moderate low carb.. I've had great results doing this and will continue